It's the Hillary Clinton we all know and love! The NY Times reports that the Secretary of State-designate is seeking to make the State Department "more powerful... with a bigger budget, high-profile special envoys to trouble spots and an expanded role in dealing with global economic issues at a time of crisis." However, "Given Mrs. Clinton’s prominence, expanding the department’s portfolio could bring on conflict with other powerful cabinet members." In other HRC news, she is not expecting to receive her $13 million loan to her presidential campaign yet, since she, via papers filed with the Federal Election Commission, is formally writing off the loan.





Whenever a Clinton put the reins in their teeth, it's time to buy stock in Boeing.
I think it's a good idea, but I can see State turning into Hillary's own fiefdom.
shadow govt
Let's see what she does before we condemn her.
+ all these big companies they write off everything. +
- You don't even know what a write off is. -
+ Do you? +
- No. I don't. -
+ But they do and they are the ones writing it off. +
Why do I have a feeling she will be setting herself up for yet another presidential run when she lands in Foggy Bottom.
she just better remember that the best SecStates were the ones who were in line with their White House instead of fighting against it or promoting a different agenda
Clinton is making a power grab? Shocking.
Here's hoping she isn't confirmed. What a vile, horrible, woman! She has yet to prove she can run a large organization, including her campaign. Bleccchhhh!!!
The Bush administration expanded the office of the Vice-President and created the KGB... eh.. DHS. Now Obama's will expand the State department.
I guess the next step would be get rid of the of the House and the Sentate. We can then hold elections for an Emperor, switching from a Democrat to a Republican every 8 years.
If you actually read the article, all it really says is that Clinton plans to restore the role of the State Dept. to what it was pre-Bush.
Does that mean the State Dept. will be "more powerful"? Yes, but any talk of conflict is pure speculation. The article does not even discuss where any conflict might occur, they just kind of assume it will, even though the article later states that Clinton's moves have the support of Sec. Gates and others in the Pentagon (hello, editor?).
The NYT liberal bias strikes again.